Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    December 10, 2012 1:30pm-2:00pm PST

1:30 pm
be contained in the road way itself, that there was not going to be a way where rain water would jump the curb on to the sidewalk and entering the back sidewalk in these specific cases. it was evaluated based upon the design of a standard driveway cut and it was reviewed by design engineers, licensed engineers, and determined that it was appropriate, that this situation that is being described by the concerned citizens will not happen. the disability access coordinator did review the design and determined this satisfies the accessibility requirement related to the sidewalk area. so while i recognize that the concerns were brought up, it had been addressed through the design. >> and i know this meeting was properly noticed but i'm just wondering how dpw generally follows up with residents with these concerns. i think there is some comments made that the
1:31 pm
department's hearing was in june and that the first they had learned of this kind of was a few days ago, but i'm just wondering what's your general process of following up with residents. >> thank you, commissioner. thank you, supervisor. normally what happens is usually within 30 days of a hearing, we would provide a finding or notification to all the people who attended that hearing. in this specific case, because there was additional review required, it delayed -- without that information we could not make a final decision and that delayed it. we were unable until approximately early to mid-november to generate the final finding in this case and i think it became a timing issue of getting it to the citizens and the people who were at that hearing and then as it relates also to supporting this to this board at this point, but we normally do try to inform the people at the hearing and the applicant
1:32 pm
within 30 days or once a decision has been made in this case it was kind of unique because there was additional studies that needs to happen and it wasn't completed within that 30 day window. >> it does sound like supervisor campos' office notified some of the residents but it sounds like dpw didn't notify them after the hearings that you held. >> i have to go back and check. i don't know if we did or not and for that i apologize. >> there's a question from supervisor cohen. >> one of the speakers raised a request for a speed bump near his residence. i was wondering if dpw -- not dpw, it's mta that usually does traffic calming evaluations, is that correct? >> that is correct, supervisor. >> do you guys ever work in coordination with each other?
1:33 pm
>> yes, normally on something like this it would be reviewed by the mta and we would work with them to find the appropriate permitting to issue. we have to figure out in this case whether it was something that's going to be requested from mta or through the project sponsor. >> so i guess to the neighbor, i don't know if you -- did you request speed bumps or some kind of evaluation through mta? no, no, i'm not worried about them, the agency that actually does the evaluation, puts in the speed bumps, is mta, the metropolitan transportation authority. my question is did you apply for a speed bump through that program or a traffic calming evaluation? yes? >> so, supervisor cohen, instead of having this dialogue, we've closed public comment but i guess we could reopen and allow the gentleman to respond to your question.
1:34 pm
>> okay, sure. please come to the podium. >> sir, if you could come to the podium and without objection. >> thank you, john. >> issue of developing the property. the main reason we're here today is because we had one day's notice. saturday we all got letters that this meeting was taking place and that the chair would entertain a motion to have the full board review it tomorrow. that doesn't give us any time to give our objections that we were supposed to give after the meeting on june 6th, which never happened. how can you go from june 6 to december 7th and send a letter out to the people that are being affected by this without telling them a word in between? that's what we got from dpw >> let me ask a question. if a continuance is granted, what do you expect to happen in between the period of time --. >> well, the neighbors can be notified there's going to be a meeting.
1:35 pm
>> i'm sorry, can you speak into the mic? i can hardly hear you. >> the neighbors can have adequate notice to attend that meeting and voice their concerns that despite what it said in the email from eleanor tang have not been addressed to the neighborhood. we've been fighting this for two years and at the last meeting they said they would in two weeks get back to us with answers on our objections. the answer was saturday we got a letter saying this meeting was taking place today. >> so my next question is, have you had any conversation with the project sponsor? >> not since june. >> not since june? so you've been waiting on a response from dpw >> yes. never got it. none of us. >> (inaudible). >> so i know miss tang said the project sponsor is present. supervisor cohen is asking if
1:36 pm
we could hear a response from the project sponsor. thank you, sir. supervisor wiener. >> when the project sponsor is done, i was unclear from dpw's response about whether the normal procedure for dpw would have resulted in the specified notice. that was a little unclear to me. >> sir. >> good afternoon, (inaudible) consulting. we started working on this project on july of 2008. we had two, two-unit buildings proposed on this site and we met with the east slope design review board, the design review board, we did a number of meetings with them, initially before they even filed the building permit.
1:37 pm
after we filed the building permit we made modifications to the design and filed with the planning commission and we were asking for a parking variance so we could keep the square footage of the building so it could accommodate the two, two-unit buildings. we were asked at that meeting to avoid doing a variance and reduce the size of the building. we have gone from 4 units to 2 units and now it's single families, we have lost over 1700 square feet, we have gone through a number of meetings with neighborhood and all that discussing the facade and the bulk of the building. . >> so when were those meetings that you held with the neighborhood. >> initially on july 28, i actually have a chronology, i can share that with you. july
1:38 pm
28 of 2008, we meet again on august 11 of 2008, we filed a building permit in december of 2009, then, you know, we met again with the east slope, the vernal heights east sloan design review on april 19, 2010. we revised the plans and sent the revised plans basically to the east slope design review board and held another meeting. we got their full support since we are not asking for any variances or conditional use applications on this site. at this point all the bulk issues and design issues were resolved through two planning commission hearings and through the rdt, the initial design
1:39 pm
team, the planning department, this issue of hydraulics and throughout the whole process we basically requested from the neighbors because constantly they were opposing the drainage and all that type of stuff, the structural issues of the building and all that. we asked, you know, the neighbors to hire a licensed engineer to come by and basically take a look at our plans and see whether it is flood. we are human too, maybe make a mistake. during the whole time, since, you know, 2008 that we have been at this, not once they have consulted an engineer or a licensed architect to come by and say, hey, your plans do not work and causes an issue. as for the sidewalk, again, we had the same issue with the director's hearing at the dpw, we hired an outside consultant, my client paid for an outside consultant to look at it and their finding was that, you
1:40 pm
know, there was no impact on the surrounding homes. dpw took on this project themselves and did major hydraulic calculations and reviews and they felt that there was also no issue with the building. >> okay. >> just an engineering aspect of this project. i don't know how the neighbors could have a take on it without licensed engineer opposing us. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> thank you, supervisor cohen. can we just bring mr. kwan back up from dpw to answer more clearly what kind of notice do you usually give to residents that have serious concerns about a project and why weren't they notified? apparently they were not before this hearing between june and now. >> supervisor john kwan for the department of public works once again. the issues raised by the
1:41 pm
citizens related to this directors' hearing that we had, okay, involve certain review and by the design team in this case, they engaged a design professional who made the evaluation. we did not receive that package until mid to late august. it took us time to review. by the time we completed the review, it was already in november and at that point we started packaging up the findings along with the legislation normally at that point we would then notify all the people who had attended that director's hearing in this case. what happened is it appears to be an error, an oversight on our part, that we somehow did not inform them properly or if timely right after we submitted the package. however, again, based upon the evaluation it appears that the technical reasons that was brought forward in the hearing was satisfied. it appears that
1:42 pm
right now the issue appears not of a technical nature, but more related to the construction of this building which falls under both planning and building department. >> which went through the proper procedures and were approved for -- within dbi and planning. >> according to the project sponsor starting 2008 and they have a building permit in process. so, again, this is just one small element of the entire development which is the area in the public right of way, the driveway and the sidewalk area. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> colleagues, if there are no other questions, is there a motion on this item? supervisor wiener. >> i'm still confused about the notice thing. >> i am uncomfortable, it sounds like maybe dpw, we might have dropped the ball in terms
1:43 pm
of the noticing, if there's an error in reporting. i understand they got some special findings late in the game and in order for them to package it all up and bring to land use and complete the time lane that things were a little bit rushed. supervisor wiener, i don't think that's the normal standard of, from what i've seen working with dpw >> what i would say is the sponsor of the legislation is not here and neither is supervisor campos. my inclination would be, i would want them to weigh in on this, so my inclination would be to forward it to the board where they will be, they will always have the option to continue it or to send it back to committee. if they were here now we could ask them that, but that would be, that's one
1:44 pm
option that we would pursue. >> that's to forward to the board without recommendation. >> yeah, i could agree with that. i also want to go on record, our office spoke with supervisor campos who was in favor of this particular project but it's probably better that we hear it from him as opposed to me as a third party, third person, so i support that motion. >> so sounds like there's a motion to forward without objection. is there any objection to that? >> mr. chair, as a committee report for tomorrow? >> as a committee report for the december 11, 2012 meeting. without objection, colleagues, thank you. thank you. >> (inaudible). >> so tomorrow's board meeting is where this will be heard and we'll hopefully hear from supervisor chiu, the sponsor, and possibly supervisor campos, whose district this resides in. supervisor wiener. >> i would say to member s of the public between now and then it would be a good idea if it
1:45 pm
hasn't happened already to communicate with supervisor campos, with president chiu as the sponsor and as the district supervisor and then take it from there. >> also i'd like to just add please rouse your neighbors for tomorrow's board meeting. >> (inaudible). >> thank you for coming to testify. we have to move to the next item. miss miller. >> item no. 2 is a resolution approving resdeg nation of 47 street artist selling spaces at hallidie plaza on 5th street. >> howard lazar >> thank you for the opportunity to present this to you. we're talking about hallidie plaza, pal and market street. the board of supervisors designated these spaces in 1977 to the street artists so for the past 35 years, this has been a
1:46 pm
tremendous viable selling location for the artists and we've been grateful for that. recently we were approached by the union square business improvement district with their plan to beautify that plaza, totally upgrade it, you can hear the details from donna figurata, and they want to present the street artists in a more favorable means. what the bid is proposing is to create uniform street artist stalls or displays and these would bear the city logo on them, they would all have a uniform color, and the idea would be that they could be easily identifiable even across the street if you are coming out of the westfield complex. the art commission likes this
1:47 pm
idea, they have endorsed it, the bid is also willing to pay for these displays. it would be a voluntary program, okay, this is not coming out of the street artist money and it's totally voluntary. if the street artist doesn't want to do it, fine. but we want to give it, like, a one-year trial period to see how it would work out. also what i wanted to call your attention to is that by law the street artist displays are 3 feet deep this way by 4 feet long this way, and no taller than 5 feet. and the design that the bid and the art commission staff came up with would exceed two of those dimensions. they would exceed the length dimension by one
1:48 pm
feet and exceed the height dimension by two feet, they would make it 7 feet tall. if you were to approve this pilot program and the redesignation of these 47 spaces, it would be with the exemption from two regulations, the regulation that says a street artist space must be no more than 4 feet wide and the regulation that says that it can be no taller than 5 feet and then there's a third regulation and that is that street artist displays cannot be within 5 feet of each other. so if you increase each space around the plaza rail, if you can picture this, then instead of there being 5 feet between the spaces, there would be 3 feet between the spaces. you did this historically speaking about nearly 30 years ago when you exempted 12 spaces around bart plaza at market and
1:49 pm
maupblt montgomery street. there is precedent here. in fact, you've granted exemptions in no less than 40 resolutions over the years for the street artist spaces so long as there wasn't a public safety problem, of course. that really is it. i wanted to stress it would be a one-year pilot program. your exemption would be for a year and we'd see what would happen after that, whether i'd be before you again or just let it sunset. i'm perfectly happen to answer any questions if i may. >> thank you, i see no questions, so let's open this up for public comment. is there anyone from the public that would like to speak? i have one card of francisco
1:50 pm
decasa. >> supervisors, the gentleman here has presented to you something he wants to be put in place for a year. i have no problem with the gentleman proposing something unique. i am open to it. what i want to impress upon this gentleman, who has a lot of power, believe me, and it comes from matters with this, he has been approached by the veterans, we have some veterans, it's a very sad sight to see our veterans when they are on the street. but then you have some veterans who want a stall or who want some help so that they can sell their wares, this gentleman has brought hurdles in the past. i have been approached by the veterans, i myself am working
1:51 pm
with these veterans and i have asked one of the veterans to go and see the mayor personally. but now that this issue has come here before this board and this gentleman has other ideas to have more stalls i am going to request the gentleman that the only two veterans that sell their wares by 5th and market that he have a meeting with them and he accommodate the veterans, the veterans who put their lives on the line who come here, many a time they cannot get a job, they become creative, they want to sell their wares and this city and county of san francisco who should be helping our veterans, i am requesting the gentleman to accommodate the veterans. if he does not then i will take
1:52 pm
it to the highest level. thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker. >> (singing) ain't no valley high, ain't no valley low, ain't no space wide enough can stop us. if you need an artist we'll find a space for you, you don't need to worry, ain't no city space wide enough, ain't no city space low enough can keep me from spaces to you, remember the day you made a space, you made so free and i know i thanked you for what you did and i know now that i'm glad and make it better, don't make it sad. and there are spaces i remember all my life i got an
1:53 pm
artist space and these spaces have some meaning and now it's up to you too. >> thank you, walter. next speaker. >> good afternoon, i'm donna figarota with the union square business district. i just wanted to talk a little bit about the background for this project. it grew out of a larger vision for hallidie plaza that was developed by the bid streetscapes committee that would create better access from the top to the bottom with a (inaudible) approach that would allow for a larger range of
1:54 pm
activities like flower stands, and the street artists being a very important part of hallidie plaza were folded into that. right now the artists when they exist, they are lost in the confusion of people, street performers and tourists in line buying muni tickets around the cable car. we want to increase the visibility of the street artists as an asset and promote them as an asset in an attraction for both tourists living and working in the area. the display table which we've got here, i don't know if you can put on the overhead, if you can see it, anyway, what that does was it really allows a better exposure, a greater visibility of the artist with colorful and professionally designed display tables. it distinguishes the artist as members of a city program and
1:55 pm
will provide a convenient checkout process. we'll be partnering with our mjn management. steven chula designed this professionally and we want to help the artists look better. thank you. >> thank you. if there's no other member s of the public that would like to speak, let's close public comment. colleagues, i know that mr. de costa raised questions about artist access. >> thank you for the opportunity of responding, i really wanted to. many years ago i sought special exemptions for the veterans in the street artist program. we have i believe at least a dozen veterans in our program who do not pay any fees. this is the
1:56 pm
exemption, the legislation -- it wasn't legislation, it was a clarification from the city attorney's office that we could waive the fees for any honorablely discharged veteran. however, the veteran must comply with all the regulations. street artists ordinance. they could not be given a license just because they are a veteran. in other words, they do have to come in like anybody else and demonstrate that they make their own hand made wares in front of us and they have to comply with all the regulations that you have granted for all street artists to be subject to them. but, yes, the art commission has definited stepped forward many years ago to accommodate the veterans. >> thank you so much, mr. lazar colleagues, if there are no
1:57 pm
objections can we move this forward without objection? without objection. miss miller, please call item 3. >> item no. 3 is an ordinance designating sam jordan's bar from 4006 to 4006 as a landmark. >> sam joerd dan's bar has been an institution in the bayview neighborhood for many many years and sam jordan himself was truly an inspirational figure. he was the first african american to run for mayor in san francisco in 1963, he was a longshore man, a golden globes boxer and a staunch community activist and his legacy continues to live on and you see it in his children and his grandchildren. sam jordan's bar has served as an important gathering place for the city's working class and the african american
1:58 pm
community. i believe land marking this place is long overdue. we have planning staff here to provide the committee with an overview of this legislation and landmarking request and with that i'd like to invite you to come up and make a presentation. thank you. >> i did have an image for the overhead. >> it takes a second. overhead, please. >> can we zoom out a little bit? >> i'm not sure if you need to do it from the machine there or not. i think you should just continue. >> good afternoon, supervisors, mary brown, planning department staff to present the proposed designation for sam jordan's bar as an individual poland lark under article 10 of the planning code. at the request of the land owner the project
1:59 pm
was added to the land mark work program in 2011. at both the june and july hearing the historic commission voted unanimously in favor of the building based on its historical significance. to summarize, the build is significant for its association with the life of a person significant in our past. it is a physical location and geographic locus of the life work of sam jordan. jordan was a prominent business, political, social and cultural leader in the bayview neighborhood through the middle decades of the 20th century. sam jordan's support of african american entrepreneurship, civil rights and political involvement began before 1958 when he took ownership of the bar and remained constant until his death in 2003. his influence extended far beyond the neighborhood to include the larger sphere